Perhaps the single biggest problem in both Pakistan and Afghanistan is corruption in state agencies. The two states have failed to tackle the problem.

Posted by , 17th November 2009

Friends of both countries are hesitant to point out these failures for reasons best understood by them alone. Corruption exists in large parts of the world and its existence in Pakistan and Afghanistan is not a unique phenomenon. It is only that the Global War on Terror has produced increasing complexity and urgency in the matter. Undoubtedly, corruption is a major problem in the Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Kristof looks at statistics about US health care to debunk the myth that we have the best health care system in the world. Among 19 developed countries that have succeeded in avoiding “preventable deaths,” the US ranks last, and it did not rank first on any other comparison list. In most countries people do have longer waits to see specialists, but they also have longer hospital stays and more medication. In addition, Americans pay 118 percent more per pill for that medication, and insurance companies, not the government, decide whether to offer or deny life-saving treatment. After Americans reach age 65, they can expect to live longer than people in other nations because they have universal health care called Medicare.

Harvard professor Michael Sandel makes a practice of attempting to bring moral clarity to the choices inherent in a democratic society. His most recent efforts involve the definition of populist justice, which Sandel claims are utilitarianism (the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people) and individual freedom (whatever is decided between consenting adults is just). The professor critiques both of these definitions and has come to the conclusion that we are bound by more than individual choice in our decisions about right and wrong. A “communitarian” approach that recognizes moral convictions born of deep attachments may be the most just and moral way to govern society.

The peace Nobel is a much misunderstood prize, writes Stephens. If you’re among those who think Obama’s Nobel was misjudged and premature, not to say absurd, then you really know nothing about the values and thinking that have informed a century of prize giving.

Posted by , 14th October 2009

Bret Stephens
10/13/2009

Far from being an aberrant choice, Obama was the ideal one, “Scandinavianally” speaking. Most of the prize winners draw from the obscure ranks of those who believe all conflict stems from avoidable misunderstanding and that the world’s evils spring from everything but the hearts of men, where love abides. Stephens concludes that what Obama’s award portends for the kind of peace and security bequeathed to us by the exertions of such non-Nobelists as Truman, Eisenhower, Thatcher, and Reagan is another question.

The lethal combination of an unsettling government, terrorism and a crashing economy

Posted by , 9th July 2009

Pakistan suffered from a multidimensional governance crisis of a very serious nature. The Pakistani state was not performing as expected and the political system was fragile. Notwithstanding the fact that Pakistan was a nuclear power, the country was weakened from within because of continued political and economic crisis of immense magnitude.

Fernández de Kirchner must put aside the diplomatic arrogance full of grand proclamations and responsibly face up to a foreign policy in which the results coincide with Argentina’s strategic guidelines. A preliminary assessment of her performance leaves big question marks and a feeling of deception.